Euthanasia

[mapuc]

A friends comment in an another thread made me remember the discussion we had here in Denmark on the subject Euthanasia.

Euthanasia is not allowed in Denmark, the Danish government has asked ethical counsel to make a report on whether it should be allowed or not. The ethical counsel is strongly against it. Which this report will be affected by.

Euthanasia is a tough nut to crack, there are several types of euthanasia.

Should it be total free on every shelf ?

I myself are for it, if the patient is terminal ill- I'm against it if the person just feel depressed-Here there are lots of medicament which can help and therapy.

I know it is allowed in the Netherlands and Switzerland.

Here's more about it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia

Markus

[Dargo]

In the Netherlands it is allowed under certain rules it is not that you can go to the doctor and ask euthanise me the doctor needs to determine that there is a real cause for someone to end his life also the doctor can not decide this on his own. There must also be determined physical and mentally that life can not be saved.

[Aktungbby]

In the Netherlands it is allowed under certain rules it is not that you can go to the doctor and ask: "euthanise me"; the doctor needs to determine that there is a real cause for someone to end his life also the doctor can not decide this on his own. There must also be determined physical and mentally that life can not be saved....ending "intractable suffering" being the key definition to any such assessment.:hmmm::oops::dead:

[Dargo]

...ending "intractable suffering" being the key definition to any such assessment.:hmmm::oops::dead:The physician must be convinced that the patient's suffering is hopeless and unbearable.

[Shadowblade]

I remember a case when paralympian in Canada was asking for help with stairlift. They offered her euthanasia instead <facepalm>.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/christine-gauthier-paralympian-euthanasia-canada-b2238319.html

[mapuc]

In the Netherlands it is allowed under certain rules it is not that you can go to the doctor and ask euthanise me the doctor needs to determine that there is a real cause for someone to end his life also the doctor can not decide this on his own. There must also be determined physical and mentally that life can not be saved.

Thank you Dargo I knew it was allowed, however I didn't knew it was under certain rules.

It should be under certain rules, me think

Markus

[mapuc]

In just a few months, it will probably be possible to take one's own life in Switzerland with a single push of a button inside a small transportable capsule.

https://nyheder-tv2-dk.translate.goog/udland/2024-07-17-transportabel-selvmordskapsel-kan-vaere-klar-til-brug-om-maaneder?_x_tr_sl=da&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=da&_x_tr_pto=wapp

Markus

[Platapus]

I am in favor of it.


Part of freedom to live your own life, should include the freedom to end it.

[Skybird]

You are free to kill yourself at any time if that is what you want - or your state of mind makes you to think you want. However, the more restrictions the state sets up to prevent you doing that, the dirtier and more miserable your ways necessarly must be to practice this natural and inherent right.

Ethically I defend the right to end your life. Your right does not include that other smust actovely assist. But they also shall not have the right to needlessly raise obstacle to you.

Nothing but disbust for those who kill themsleves and do it in a way that pulls others down with them as well. Openin the gas in a hosue and blow it up, killing yourself, and other inhabitant sof that house, too. Leaving a scar in a train pilots' life by throwing yourself in front of his train. Committing suicide as a pilot by steerign the plane you pilot into the ground along with all crew and passengers.

The complicaton that makes it all so difficult is that you can be mentally sick, suffer from a temporary state of low mood that might go over. But will not if you ended your life.

I do not trust state laws and officials or medical doctors being qualified the assess the state of my life, my life's affairs. Nor do i give them the right to have a say in it.

The last two paragraphs' content collide, and the dilemma cannot be solved satisfactory for each and every individual case there is. In case of doubt I decide - like always these days - against the state's claim for executing power over people. The state is too corrupt, is too much driven by interests that frontally collide with the interest of the individual. Also, its big business to keep people alive at any cost, no matter their suffering. Big money is in it. There is no more personal decision whether or not to end your life. Any state government, law system and religious ideology I totally exclude from having a say in this. It would be my decision, and nobody else's.

Basta.

I had one friend who committed suicide. While I had ideas why he did it, I knew I did not know all relevant factors for sure, and rejected myself speculations. I remember him, I do not judge him, but I carried on with my own life and do not allow him to affect me beyond the day of his death. The assassination by car accident of my fiance on the other hand was much more difficult to deal with and silently echoes on until today. The drunk driver committing the deed I never have forgiven, and have no intention to ever forgive him. Why would I?

Its people's decision whether they want to live on or not. So for heaven's sake - let them. The German word for suicide is "Selbstmord" and translates into "self murdering". Thats an idiotic German term. Its no murder. Its your most intimate, elemental and natural right, makring what should be most preicous in your life as long as you live it: your sovereignty over yourself. Thats why many religions and politicians find it so hard to tolerate it. They dont want soverreign, self-reliant persons, they want submissive, owned subjects.

[MaDef]

I seem to recall reading an article a few months ago about a woman in her late 20's early 30's (can't quite remember) who was allowed to kill herself because she was "clinically depressed". She was in perfect heath otherwise. Not sure I can get onboard with "legalized" euthanasia based on such a subjective condition?

Oregon has a right to die law, but one of the conditions is: "Have a terminal illness that will result in death within six months", That's a pretty clear bar, so while I'm not a fan, I can understand the reasoning for it.

[Moonlight]

I saw a lot of thalidomide teenagers+ in my late teens, they were all around my age and some of the worst ones had some of the lads throwing their lunch up. No one ever suggested that they should be euthanised and if they had done they would have been fired on the spot. It's not the done thing in England old boy and, if other governments want to interfere in the natural process of life then they will have to face their own moral conscience at some point.
Thankfully, it's only briefly been touched upon in the past here, but who can say whether it will become a hot topic in the near future.

[Skybird]

I seem to recall reading an article a few months ago about a woman in her late 20's early 30's (can't quite remember) who was allowed to kill herself because she was "clinically depressed". She was in perfect heath otherwise. Not sure I can get onboard with "legalized" euthanasia based on such a subjective condition?
Thats an example for the dilemma I mentioned.
In the example you give I say "No". Because in my understanding, which might be unorthodox thinking, this really destructive and complicated state of the psyche called "major depression" can be treated. But major deporession si soemhtig ery diffefnt than the low mood that laymen usually mean when they say somebody is depressive, or they feel depressed. I see major depresison as sort of a brain inflammation and yes, nutrition also has a lot to do with it, I think. In New Zealand there is a clinc somehwre where they treat and heal it - with diet exclusively, no therapy, no drugs.



Heaven knows how many of the modern deseases are diet-caused. Most of them, I say. Some doctors have started to classify Alzheimers as "Diabetes Type 3", diabetes type 1 is genetic and diabetes type 2 is a hormonal dysbalance and type 3 would be a metabolic desease, a mix of intoxication and nutrients depletion. Why I mention this? Because I already said in my post before, there is a dilemma, and it is numerous and complex and not just an exception from the rule - it is the rule, most likely, and thats what makes this topic so extremely tricky to deal with.



I warn of easy answers and firing judgements of others from the hip. Chances are almost always that you do not know the full story behind the individual case.

[Skybird]

I saw a lot of thalidomide teenagers+ in my late teens, they were all around my age and some of the worst ones had some of the lads throwing their lunch up. No one ever suggested that they should be euthanised and if they had done they would have been fired on the spot. It's not the done thing in England old boy and, if other governments want to interfere in the natural process of life then they will have to face their own moral conscience at some point.
Thankfully, it's only briefly been touched upon in the past here, but who can say whether it will become a hot topic in the near future.
Markus' topic is not about state-ordered euthanasia, but about yourself voluntarily wanting to end your own life and whetehr state and/or society hsould be allowed to have a say in this your own personal sovereign decision. And when is this decision maybe not as sovereign anymore as it seems to be from a principal point of view - the dilemma I pointed at?

[mapuc]

Thank you for your input.

Yes it is an ethical dilemma I think we have to take a decision whether we like it or not.

One day it could be a relative or a very close friend who have the wish to end their life and here you are as a next of kin or friends, to take a standpoint.

Somehow I agree with some of you except it shouldn't be allowed if a person isn't terminal sick.

Or should we let each and everyone decide if they wanna end their days whatever reason they may have ?

In Danish it is called selvmord-Almost as the same in German Selbstmord

Edit
A friend wrote this in a comment
"Why are we in such a hurry to make death and not life easier?"
End edit

Markus

[Moonlight]

Markus' topic is not about state-ordered euthanasia, but about yourself voluntarily wanting to end your own life and whetehr state and/or society hsould be allowed to have a say in this your own personal sovereign decision. And when is this decision maybe not as sovereign anymore as it seems to be from a principal point of view - the dilemma I pointed at?

Here's the kicker in the UK old boy, anything to do with Euthanasia\assisted dying is the domain of Parliamentarians and not citizens, euthanise anyone in the UK and you'll be charged with manslaughter or murder, and the same charges will be brought if that person kills some one while trying to kill himself. This subject is a lot bigger than just committing suicide Skybird, why don't you all look at how far your government has delved it's depths, you might all be surprised.

Parliamentary activity
The Government considers any potential change to the law to be “a matter for Parliament to decide and an issue of conscience for individual parliamentarians rather than one for Government policy”.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer KC is reportedly personally supportive of a change in the law; however, he has said any changes should be the subject of a free vote by MPs to respect the “strong views” on either side. In March 2024, in a telephone call between Sir Keir and Dame Esther Rantzen filmed by ITV News, Sir Keir committed to making parliamentary time for a vote on changing the law in the next parliament should he become Prime Minister.

Several Private Members’ Bills in both the Commons and the Lords have (unsuccessfully) sought to legalise assisted suicide or voluntary euthanasia. Most recently in the Commons, Rob Marris MP tabled the Assisted Dying Bill (No 2) 2015, which did not progress beyond second reading after it was defeated on a free vote by 330 votes to 118. In the Lords, Baroness Meacher (Crossbench) introduced the Assisted Dying Bill [HL] 2021-22 in May 2021. The Bill did not proceed after the end of the 2021-22 session.

In February 2024, the Health and Social Care Select Committee published a report on Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide (AD/AS). The Committee did not come down for or against AD/AS; instead, it said the purpose of its report was to provide a basis for discussion and debate in future parliaments, rather than to resolve the debate one way or another.

Coming to you in the next twenty years or so. :O:

[mapuc]

Moonlight is right

This is taken from the wiki link I posted in my first post

"The British House of Lords select committee on medical ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering" "

Markus

[Rockstar]

“If you die before you die. You will not die when you die”

[Platapus]

"Or should we let each and everyone decide if they wanna end their days whatever reason they may have ?"


Thought experiment: Why not?

[Jimbuna]

"Or should we let each and everyone decide if they wanna end their days whatever reason they may have ?"


Thought experiment: Why not?

That being the million dollar question :yep: